Board 8 > Coronavirus Topic 3: Trials and Tribulations

(+) Yeah! (+)

My city hasn't quite declared an emergency yet but schools are closed down as of today, public transit is being cut back, pretty much everything the city runs is shut down, etc. Hopefully I can still find shit I need at the grocery store.

---

https://www.investors.com/news/technology/mrna-stock-rockets-biotech-doses-first-patient-coronavirus-vaccine-test/

Sell Limit at 40, I believe!

---

Corrik7 posted...

I am not sure this lockdown strategy is the best strategy. I feel like maybe we should be imposing limits on events but also be focusing all efforts on medical beds, ventilators, and hospital units. I am not sure if limiting the curve is better than increasing ability to handle the curve.

This of course means crash coursing training of nurses and doctors, using military and red Cross, etc.

Some hospitals are close to facing capacity issues now when only a very small fraction of the local population is infected. We absolutely do need to ramp up production of medical supplies/ventilators, but that's not gonna be able to compete with exponential growth. We really need to get down to at worst linear growth to get a handle on this thing.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Some hospitals are close to facing capacity issues now when only a very small fraction of the local population is infected. We absolutely do need to ramp up production of medical supplies/ventilators, but that's not gonna be able to compete with exponential growth. We really need to get down to at worst linear growth to get a handle on this thing.

Problem is that they ran a study and to keep the curve low enough for the medical to handle, and this is assuming perfect distribution that it would take 10 years of lockdowns. Now I get your hoping for a best case scenario of a vaccine after 18 months, but still that's like 2 years of lockdowns.

Is that feasible? We would have like 50% unemployment and everyone would lose their homes and such at that point.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Problem is that they ran a study and to keep the curve low enough for the medical to handle, and this is assuming perfect distribution that it would take 10 years of lockdowns. Now I get your hoping for a best case scenario of a vaccine after 18 months, but still that's like 2 years of lockdowns.

Is that feasible? We would have like 50% unemployment and everyone would lose their homes and such at that point.

That's under the assumption that we can't stop the spread of the virus. If we can in fact get R below 1 (and maintain it) we can wipe it out sooner. South Korea has actually gotten past the peak of their outbreak without shutting down, BUT they have capabilities that we currently don't. In particular they can test anyone who needs to be tested and they have temperature checks pretty much everywhere. Before we go back to (semi) normal, we're going to need to have something like that in place (and will probably need to continue at least normal social distancing until a vaccine is developed/continue travel restrictions while other regions have uncontrolled outbreaks).

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

That's under the assumption that we can't stop the spread of the virus. If we can in fact get R below 1 (and maintain it) we can wipe it out sooner. South Korea has actually gotten past the peak of their outbreak without shutting down, BUT they have capabilities that we currently don't. In particular they can test anyone who needs to be tested and they have temperature checks pretty much everywhere. Before we go back to (semi) normal, we're going to need to have something like that in place (and will probably need to continue at least normal social distancing until a vaccine is developed/continue travel restrictions while other regions have uncontrolled outbreaks).

It takes just one person to community spread after 14 days to start it all over again.

And, I can tell you right now that people are fighting against the shutdowns. Have at least 2 bars locally that basically said fuck governor wolf. If he wants to shut down my bar, then tell him to pay my bills.

Removing the virus by removing spread is impossible at this stage. That is an onset goal. This is everywhere. That's impossible now. This strategy is a mitigation strategy. The question is if this strategy when weighed with mass foreclosure, unemployment, suicide, and breakdown of society is if this is the right way to go.

---

Wanglicious posted...

the city of angels going FUCK OFF WE'RE FULL.

Never thought we would see California turn around and beg for a wall but here we are

The only other choice is giving up and probably ending up with ~2% of the population dying. If that's not acceptable (it certainly isn't for me), we need to take drastic action now because waiting or half-assing it will just make it even harder to get under control in the future.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

The only other choice is giving up and probably ending up with ~2% of the population dying. If that's not acceptable (it certainly isn't for me), we need to take drastic action now because waiting or half-assing it will just make it even harder to get under control in the future.

I am torn between both sides. 1. Is it actually preventable? 2. How many lives are ruined or lost in return on the other end?

If suicides surge 100%, homelessness surges 1000%, etc. Did we do the right thing?

I see both angles. I am just not sure which is right. And, to top it off... We have people following orders and getting destroyed financially for others to defy it.

---

Peridiam posted...

Puerto Rico is in total lockdown now until the 30th. Can't leave your home other than for emergencies/essential goods.

I always forget that you live here @Peridiam

How you holding out?

---

Corrik7 posted...

I am torn between both sides. 1. Is it actually preventable? 2. How many lives are ruined or lost in return on the other end?

If suicides surge 100%, homelessness surges 1000%, etc. Did we do the right thing?

I see both angles. I am just not sure which is right. And, to top it off... We have people following orders and getting destroyed financially for others to defy it.

Well like I said South Korea has gotten it under control without a lockdown but with extensive testing capability, so I think there's reason to be optimistic that stopping it here is possible. If we do this now I do think there's a decent chance that the long term disruption will not have to be as severe as these lockdowns. We will also need federal financial intervention to mitigate the problems you're talking about.

Basically regardless of what we do things are gonna suck, but this is our best shot of making it suck the least.

---

my city has joined the no dine in at restaurants

pretty much means every bartender and server (80% students) we have will not be working for the next 2-3 weeks (i think it will be much longer) If we somehow increase take out business 500% maybe i still have a job but ugh

---

Is there such a thing as limiting the curve too much?

Like part of this approach requires some amount of people to still get infected and go through the process of the disease, recieve treatment if necessary, and then be immune right?

That way there's not a giant spike all at once. Otherwise, when people eventually need to return to work, everyone will still be ripe for infection and shoot to the top of the curve again. If we completely stop the spread now then it'll be just as bad later.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Problem is that they ran a study and to keep the curve low enough for the medical to handle, and this is assuming perfect distribution that it would take 10 years of lockdowns. Now I get your hoping for a best case scenario of a vaccine after 18 months, but still that's like 2 years of lockdowns.

Is that feasible? We would have like 50% unemployment and everyone would lose their homes and such at that point.

I know that medical in the region isn't able to handle things yet, but didn't Lodi province in Italy see the curve start to flatten two weeks after their lockdown went into place? Taking into account that there is a two week delay in reporting, that's a very promising result. It would imply that the effect of quarantining is almost immediate.

---

HeroicSpiderPig posted...

I know that medical in the region isn't able to handle things yet, but didn't Lodi province in Italy see the curve start to flatten two weeks after their lockdown went into place? Taking into account that there is a two week delay in reporting, that's a very promising result. It would imply that the effect of quarantining is almost immediate.

If followed which people won't until people are dying en masse here I am sure. Even then I doubt my fellow Americans

---

KinjiMuto_3 posted...

Never thought we would see California turn around and beg for a wall but here we are

not only that but Mexico wants to close their border with us!
i await Mexico paying for a wall to do so.

CoolCly posted...

Is there such a thing as limiting the curve too much?

i mean... technically no.
but it's entirely possible that measures aimed to limit the curve will result in illegal actions that make things worse ala Prohibition.

meanwhile, in the land of "this is very clearly a horrifying idea with tragic results at best, a human experiment with informative results at worst" news, we go to California.

https://twitter.com/nbcjeanelle/status/1239716623667191808


---

CoolCly posted...

Is there such a thing as limiting the curve too much?

Like part of this approach requires some amount of people to still get infected and go through the process of the disease, recieve treatment if necessary, and then be immune right?

That way there's not a giant spike all at once. Otherwise, when people eventually need to return to work, everyone will still be ripe for infection and shoot to the top of the curve again. If we completely stop the spread now then it'll be just as bad later.

I think the idea is that most people will still be exposed to the virus (it's impossible to live indefinitely without coming into contact with other people), but we can spread that out over time by avoiding unnecessary excursions and not end up with all the critically ill patients in the hospital at the same time. The media isn't focusing on the "you'll probably get sick anyway" part because then too many people won't bother doing anything.
---

Jesus

https://twitter.com/chrislhayes/status/1239638657792987139?s=21

---

That's definitely the plan and I've come around to the idea of it being a good one

But if we cancel literally everything and keep everyone in their homes, couldn't we be limiting it from spreading TOO much? For this plan to be effective, I think it's critical that some proportion of the population gets it. If we isolate now before too many people have it then isn't this just a holding measure?

---

Some of the population will get it anyway though? I'm not following your logic why limiting the spread would be a bad thing.

---

Xeybozn posted...

I think the idea is that most people will still be exposed to the virus (it's impossible to live indefinitely without coming into contact with other people), but we can spread that out over time by avoiding unnecessary excursions and not end up with all the critically ill patients in the hospital at the same time. The media isn't focusing on the "you'll probably get sick anyway" part because then too many people won't bother doing anything.

Flattening the curve is a bit of a simplification. Not everyone will get it (eventually herd immunity will stop it), and the more you slow it the better the worst case will be (a very crude estimate is that ~1-1/R of the population will get it if each person infects R others). But we should not assume that reducing R below 1 is impossible (in which case the number of cases will exponentially decay and most people wont get it); a few countries have shown that this is possible.

---

Tom Bombadil posted...

Some of the population will get it anyway though? I'm not following your logic why limiting the spread would be a bad thing.

Well the strategy of "flattening the curve" that everyone talks about is what this article is talking about with the chart, where the goal is to keep infections at a manageable level

https://medium.com/@ariadnelabs/social-distancing-this-is-not-a-snow-day-ac21d7fa78b4

What I'm wondering is if it's possible to go too strict with your measures too fast, so that the flattened curve never really starts growing. If that curve doesn't see enough growth, then eventually when measures do get relaxed, (and the measures do have to be relaxed some day) herd immunity will not have developed at all and you'll just get the original giant spike that you were hoping to avoid

So is there a level of isolation that's too strict? If you cancel school, everyone works from home, you can't go to restaurants, will it spread enough to keep a healthy growth in immunity?

What if you cancel food take out? Does THAT push it into too strict?

Some cities like NYC may already be well into spreading stages and need to take these measures, but what if you have a city that's barely had any impact yet?

---

France is being locked down:

https://twitter.com/kjalee/status/1239629200019070981?s=21

---

Our city officially banning dine-in starting tonight. The Irish pubs in the area are just devastated. Biggest day of the year for them tomorrow. They went from having to scale back their plans, to now having to eliminate them. Its unfathomable how many jobs are affected by this. And no one is hiring right now. If you get let go, good luck finding something else.

---

Apparently Amazon is trying to hire ~100k workers

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Apparently Amazon is trying to hire ~100k workers

they're waiving all drug test requirements as well

---

BREAKING: Macron announces full lockdown in France for at least two weeks. No family or social gatherings allowed

no family gatherings allowed

lives with family

KinjiMuto_3 posted...

BREAKING: Macron announces full lockdown in France for at least two weeks. No family or social gatherings allowed

no family gatherings allowed

lives with family

Gatherings. Not living with people.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Gatherings. Not living with people.

I know, I know.

Either way how do you even pretend to enforce this? Seems like a recommendation more than anything else

KinjiMuto_3 posted...

I know, I know.

Either way how do you even pretend to enforce this? Seems like a recommendation more than anything else

If they see a family reunion in a park they are gonna make yinz leave

---

Pokalicious posted...

I always forget that you live here @Peridiam

How you holding out?

I actually moved back to mainland US right before Maria hit. Not because of her though, just coincidental -- got extremely lucky.

My parents are there though and they keep me updated.

How are you doing?

---

KinjiMuto_3 posted...

I know, I know.

Either way how do you even pretend to enforce this? Seems like a recommendation more than anything else

Pretty sure they don't even believe they can enforce it effectively, they just want to get the idea out there enough for people to hopefully listen and follow it

---

Today I had chills and woke up with a cough. I am sure its not corona but im also not happy

---

KinjiMuto_3 posted...

I know, I know.

Either way how do you even pretend to enforce this? Seems like a recommendation more than anything else

There's also probably a sense that if you give someone an inch they'll take a mile. Is it fine for 3-4 friends with no symptoms to walk through a park together? Probably, but people will push up against whatever you give them, so you might as well go as harsh as you can, even if you don't plan on enforcing it.

---

I'm officially unemployed. My job is going to do whatever they can to support us, but... I dont know what to do.


---

This is why you should have an emergency fund for atleast 6 months.

---

SwiftyDC posted...

This is why you should have an emergency fund for atleast 6 months.

Upvote

Aecioo posted...

I'm officially unemployed. My job is going to do whatever they can to support us, but... I dont know what to do.

Good luck hopefully they do try and support you. Any big ticket items you could sell for fast cash if it gets dire?

he should. but a good chunk of the country doesn't have emergency funds for 6 days and this isnt' gonna help.

step 1 is file for unemployment. a lot of places have waived the waiting period so it should get you money asap.

---

The rain has made the choice easy for me lately, but I typically begin every day going out to a local park and running a pretty good distance with my dog. Now, obviously theres people there(not many, but people). Getting near people is less than ideal, but theoretically theres no problem keeping a healthy distance from the few people out and about. I think it should be ok to continue this practice, but I'm not entirely sure.

Funny enough, my dog actually still has a bit over 3 weeks on being isolated from other dogs. He came down with what the vet thinks is a form of kennel cough and I was told to keep him from having any close contact with other dogs for a month because we have better guidelines for keeping our pets healthy than we do people. So we'd already been doing the "theres a dog coming up lets veer way off the path" routine, we just have to expand that to include people.

---

Wanglicious posted...

he should. but a good chunk of the country doesn't have emergency funds for 6 days and this isnt' gonna help.

step 1 is file for unemployment. a lot of places have waived the waiting period so it should get you money asap.

My bad that was insensitive of me. I agree, file for unemployment.

---

Dow is up 4% in futures right now. Hopefully we can rebound some.

---

Wanglicious posted...

he should. but a good chunk of the country doesn't have emergency funds for 6 days and this isnt' gonna help.

step 1 is file for unemployment. a lot of places have waived the waiting period so it should get you money asap.

In a similar boat, have job but no work so I'm kind of in limbo. So I filed for unemployment even though eligibility is...questionable. Just wanted to get the first part of the paperwork done on that because I expect unemployment offices to be bogged down to hell. If my job suddenly decides they are going to pay us, I can just cancel the unemployment immediately, but I wanted to make sure I had a head start.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Dow is up 4% in futures right now. Hopefully we can rebound some.

We had a correction day after the last big drop, I think this is probably about right(I'll hold a more tempered prediction of a 1.5-2.5% gain at that most). I expect the markets to fall again as we head to the end of the week(I did put in some orders for some short term gains).

---

Futures just tanked 3% since my last post. I wish I knew how the futures works hours wise.

Barely in the green still tho.

---

Looks like 135 euro fine for whoever's out and about for no reason.

---

https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2020-03-13/china-japan-korea-coronavirus-reinfection-test-positive

---

voltch posted...

Looks like 135 euro fine for whoever's out and about for no reason.

for clarity's sake, this is in france.

---

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/3075567/people-blood-type-may-be-more-vulnerable-coronavirus-china-study

if this is true thank god for my O+ blood type! Its not peer reviewed though

---

Wish I knew my blood type.

---

Rip me

---